Comment on Eight tips about consent for fediverse developers
GlitterInfection@lemmy.world 4 weeks agoThe article addresses this directly in the section on things to not say, though:
ActivityPub does indeed “makes assumptions that are fundamentally opposed to the kinds of protections that people seem to be seeking.” But in a discussion about whether or not to get consent, even the ones that are true the miss the point – just because ActivityPub leaves open possibilities for you to do something without getting consent, that’s not the only option.
ericjmorey@discuss.online 4 weeks ago
That addressing is insufficient because it begs the question of consent being withheld. But the consent is implicitly given by the sending of information via the protocol, otherwise a service like Mastodon can’t exist. The question of asking for consent after it is given is the part that I’m conflicted about.
GlitterInfection@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Read the article, I didn’t write it.
ericjmorey@discuss.online 4 weeks ago
I did. I’m sharing my thoughts about it. Some of those thoughts are that it seems to make assumptions that don’t hold.
GlitterInfection@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
I don’t inherently agree with the article’s ask, but you’ve literally only proven its point by stating, verbatim, one of their “please stop making us retread these tired arguments over and over” points.
OP links to a Mastodon thread from a user who breaks down the technical limitations of ActivityPub and proposes how the situation can be improved. Maybe read that.
Also, it you think that these are reasonable suggestions, then perhaps ignoring them directly isn’t the best way to engage with this article?